{"id":31117,"date":"2010-07-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-06-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010"},"modified":"2017-07-21T11:07:50","modified_gmt":"2017-07-21T05:37:50","slug":"murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 1\/7\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY\n\nCRL.A.(MD) No.88 of 2009\n\nMurugan alias Amman Thoppu Murugan\n\t alias Eral Murugan\t\t\t\t.. Appellant\n\nvs\n\nState represented by\nThe Inspector of Police\nPudukottai Police Station\nTuticorin District\n(Crime No.674 of 2005)\t\t\t\t.. Respondent\n\t\nCriminal appeal preferred under Sec.374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure\nagainst the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I,\nTuticorin, made in S.C. No.129 of 2007 dated 9.1.2009.\n\n!For Appellant\t ...  Mr.S.Muthalraj\n^For Respondent\t ...  Mr.N.Senthurpandian\n\t\t      Additional Public\n\t\t      Prosecutor\n\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)<\/p>\n
\tChallenge is made to a judgment of the Additional Sessions Division, Fast
\nTrack Court No.I, Tuticorin, made in S.C. No.129 of 2007 whereby the
\naccused\/appellant stood charged under Sections 342, 392 read with 396, 364 read
\nwith 34 and 302 read with 34 of IPC, tried, found guilty under Sections 392, 364
\nread with 34 and 302 read with 34 of IPC and awarded 10 years Rigorous
\nImprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000\/- and default sentence under Section
\n392 IPC, 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000\/- and
\ndefault sentence under Sec.364 read with 34 of IPC and life imprisonment along
\nwith a fine of Rs.1,000\/- and default sentence under Sec.302 read with 34 of
\nIPC.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.Short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as
\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n
\t(a) P.W.35 was carrying on his brick chamber in front of which the
\ndeceased Dhanasekaran was also having his brick chamber. Three months prior to
\nthe occurrence, P.W.7 complained to the deceased that A-1 Subramani @ Subri beat
\nhim. On hearing this, the deceased asked A-1 to tender apology.  P.W.30, a car
\nbroker, transacted car purchase for  A-1 under the agreement Ex.P16.  P.W.36 was
\nusing the same.  While it was being actually taken for sand theft, it was
\nrecovered by P.W.6 Tahsildar.  The same was also handed over to P.W.39, the Sub
\nInspector of Police, Eral, who registered a case in Crime No.286 of 2005 as
\nfound in Ex.P22, the FIR.  A-1 had an impression that it was actually done by
\nthe deceased. The appellant was employed under A-1. He borrowed Rs.15,000\/- from
\nP.W.8.  When the amount was not returned, a complaint was given by the deceased
\non behalf of P.W.8 to the police, and thus the appellant\/accused developed
\nanimosity against the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) While the matter stood thus, on the date of occurrence, i.e.,
\n3.9.2005, the deceased who was working in his brick chamber, left the same at
\nabout 10.45 P.M., towards his house in his M.O.1, motorbike. At about 11.45
\nP.M., P.W.10, who was going along with his friend in a motorbike, found the
\ndeceased in the company of all the three accused.  Thereafter, at about 12.15
\nA.M., P.Ws.11 to 14 have seen all the three accused and also the deceased
\ntravelling in a motorbike together.  The deceased did not come home.\n<\/p>\n
\t(c) On 4.9.2005 at about 7.30 A.M. on the western side of Tuticorin –
\nTirunelveli Main Road the dead body of the deceased was found by P.W.17, the
\nVillage Menial, who informed to P.W.16, the Village Administrative Officer. On
\nverification, P.W.16 proceeded to the respondent police station and gave Ex.P1,
\nthe complaint, to P.W.40, the Sub Inspector of Police, who in turn registered a
\ncase in Crime No.674 of 2005 under Section 302 of IPC.  The printed FIR, Ex.P23,
\nwas despatched to the Court through a Constable.\n<\/p>\n
\t(d) P.W.45, the Inspector of Police of that Circle, on receipt of the copy
\nof the FIR, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and
\nprepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P2, and also a rough sketch, Ex.P33.  He
\nalso recovered M.Os.13 to 15 from the place of occurrence.  Then he conducted
\ninquest on the dead body in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and
\nprepared an inquest report, Ex.P34.  The dead body was sent to the Government
\nHospital for the purpose of autopsy.\n<\/p>\n
\t(e) P.W.33, the Medical Officer, attached to the Department of Forensic
\nMedicine, Thoothukudi Government Medical College, Thoothukudi, on receipt of the
\nrequisition, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Dhanasekaran and has issued a
\npostmortem certificate, Ex.P21, with his opinion that the deceased would appear
\nto have died of shock and haemorrhage due to heavy cut injury to neck.\n<\/p>\n
\t(f) Pending investigation, the Investigator arrested A-1 on 17.9.2005. He
\ngave a confessional statement voluntarily, which was recorded. The admissible
\npart is marked as Ex.P6, pursuant to which he produced M.O.17, cash of
\nRs.15,000\/-, which was recovered under a cover of mahazar, Ex.P7.  M.O.16, cell
\nphone, M.O.18, motorbike, M.O.19, towel, and M.O.1, motorbike, produced by him,
\nwere also recovered under a cover of mahazar.  Following the same, the present
\nappellant was arrested on 18.9.2005, when he came forward to give a confessional
\nstatement.  The same was recorded.  The admissible part is marked as Ex.P26.
\nFollowing the same, he produced M.O.2, cell phone, M.O.23, shirt, and M.O.24,
\nlunghi, which were recovered under a cover of mahazar.  On the same day, A-2 was
\narrested when he gave a confessional statement.  The same was recorded.  All of
\nthem were sent for judicial remand.\n<\/p>\n
\t(g) The test identification parade was conducted pursuant to the
\nrequisition made, as per the orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate by P.W..32,
\nJudicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti.  The identification parade proceedings are
\nmarked as Ex.P19.  P.W.46, the Inspector of Police of that Circle, took up
\nfurther investigation and on completion of the same, filed the final report.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.Before the matter was committed, one of the accused namely A-1, died and
\nso far as A-2 was concerned, he also absconded.  Then the case was split up in
\nrespect of A-3, the present appellant.  The case was committed to Court of
\nSessions, and necessary charges were framed.  In order to substantiate the
\ncharges, the prosecution examined 46 witnesses and also relied on 37 exhibits
\nand 30 material objects.  On completion of the evidence on the side of the
\nprosecution, the appellant was questioned under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. as to the
\nincriminating circumstances found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses
\nwhich he flatly denied as false.  No defence witness was examined.  The trial
\nCourt  heard the arguments advanced on either side, and took the view that the
\nprosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and hence found him
\nguilty and awarded the punishment as referred to above.  Hence this appeal at
\nthe instance of the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.Advancing arguments on behalf of the appellant, the learned Counsel
\nMr.S.Muthalraj has made the following submissions which, according to him, would
\nsuffice to set aside the judgment of the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t(i) The case of the prosecution was that on 3.9.2005 during night hours,
\nA-1 to A-3 have abducted the deceased and also caused his death, and it was also
\na murder for gain.  Even as per the prosecution case, A-1 and A-2 had a grudge,
\nand they were on inimical terms since they had got sufficient motive. But,
\ninsofar as A-3, who is the present appellant, no motive was attributed at all.
\nWhat was all brought to the notice of the trial Court was that he was only an
\nemployee of A-1. Except this, there was nothing available to the prosecution to
\nattribute anything against him, and hence it was a case where A-3 had no motive.\n<\/p>\n
\t(ii) Apart from the above, it was a murder for gain.  But, nothing has
\nbeen recovered from him.  No cash was recovered from him.  What was recovered
\nfrom him even as per the prosecution case was only a cell phone, M.O.2, shirt,
\nM.O.23, and lunghi, M.O.24.  Thus the prosecution could not establish the fact
\nthat the appellant had got anything to do or role to play in the alleged murder
\nfor gain.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.The learned Counsel would further submit that as far as the last seen
\ntheory is concerned, P.W.10 to 14 have nowhere stated that the accused travelled
\nalong with the deceased in a motorbike; that they have categorically stated that
\nhe also went in another motorbike and thus it would be quite clear that the last
\nseen theory cannot be applied to him.\n<\/p>\n
\t6.Added further the learned Counsel that all the witnesses have seen them
\nin a junction which was actually proceeding between Tirunelveli and Tiruchendur
\nnear a Chemical Factory; but the place where the dead body was found is actually
\nsituated at Tirunelveli and Tuticorin Main Road and thus the last seen theory
\ncannot be applied to the present facts of the case; that under the
\ncircumstances, the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home either the
\ninvolvement or the guilt of the accused\/appellant; but the trial Court has taken
\nan erroneous view and found him guilty, and hence the judgment of the trial
\nCourt has got to be set aside and the appellant be acquitted.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.The Court heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on all the
\nabove contentions and paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.It is not in controversy that one Dhanasekaran, the husband of P.W.2,
\nwas done to death in an incident that had taken place in the night hours of
\n3.9.2005.  Following the inquest made and the preparation of the inquest report
\nby the Investigator, P.W.45, the dead body was subjected to postmortem by
\nP.W.33, the Medical Officer. The Doctor has given a categorical opinion before
\nthe trial Court as a witness and also through the contents found in the
\npostmortem certificate, that he died out of shock and haemorrhage due to heavy
\ncut injury to neck.  Thus the prosecution has proved the fact that he died out
\nof homicidal violence as rightly recorded by the learned Judge of the trial
\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.In order to substantiate the charges levelled against the
\nappellant\/accused, the prosecution had no direct evidence to offer.  On scrutiny
\nof the available materials, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
\nprosecution had suffice evidence to indicate the same.  It is not that this
\nCourt is unmindful of the caution made by the Apex Court and also by the rulings
\nof this Court that in a given case where the prosecution rests its entire case
\non the circumstantial evidence, it must place and prove all necessary
\ncircumstances which must not only constitute a chain without a snap, but also be
\npointing to the hypothesis that except the accused no one could have committed
\nthe offence.  Even after the application of this settled principle of law, this
\nCourt is satisfied that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused. The
\nfollowing circumstances are noticed by the Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.The first circumstance is the last seen theory spoken to by P.Ws.10 to\n<\/p>\n
14.  All the witnesses are actually strangers.  P.W.10 has spoken to the fact
\nthat at about 11.45 P.M., he saw all the accused persons going in a motorbike
\nalong with the deceased; that they were all travelling in two motorbikes, and
\nall the three accused persons and the deceased were actually found.  Apart from
\nthe said witness, P.Ws.11 to 14 have categorically stated in one voice that at
\nabout 12.15 A.M., the deceased was actually taken in a motorbike by A-1 and A-2,
\nand A-3, who is the appellant herein, was also going in another motorbike, and
\nthey have all witnessed the same.  At this juncture, the contention put forth by
\nthe learned Counsel for the appellant is that P.Ws.10 to 14 have nowhere spoken
\nto the fact that the accused has actually travelled in the same motorbike along
\nwith the deceased during night hours and that too in the witch hour, all the
\naccused persons have travelled in two motorbikes, and A-1 and A-2 have actually
\ntaken the deceased in the motorbike.  It is pertinent to point out that all the
\nwitnesses have been taken for the test identification parade, and it was
\nconducted by the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti, examined as P.W.32, and
\nthe identification parade proceedings have been marked as Ex.P19.  No infirmity
\nor illegality is noticed or brought to the notice of the Court.  In that
\nidentification parade, which was done within a reasonable time, all the
\nwitnesses have clearly identified A-3 who is the appellant before the Court.
\nNow, at this juncture, it remains to be stated that all the witnesses are
\nactually strangers and not in any way interested either in the deceased or in
\nany way inimical to the appellant.  Under the circumstances, the learned trial
\nJudge was perfectly correct in accepting the evidence of these witnesses and has
\nalso accepted the last seen theory.\n<\/p>\n
\t11.Added circumstance is the recovery of M.O.2, cell phone, M.O.23, shirt,
\nand M.O.24, lunghi.  They were all actually recovered from the present
\nappellant.  It was the appellant who at the time of arrest, gave a confessional
\nstatement voluntarily, and the same was recorded in the presence of witnesses.
\nOne of the witnesses to the said statement has also been examined in whose
\npresence the appellant\/accused has produced M.Os.2, 23 and 24.  P.W.1, the close
\nrelative of the deceased, has identified that all these material objects
\nbelonged to the deceased.  Once all these clothes were worn by the deceased and
\nalso the cell phone, M.O.2, happened to be in the custody of the appellant, it
\nis for him to explain how he came into custody of these material objects which
\nbelonged to the deceased. The arrest, confession and also recovery of these
\nitems which belonged to the deceased and are found to be in the custody of the
\nappellant would also be pointing to the nexus of the appellant with the crime.
\nThus it can be well stated that the last seen theory and also the recovery of
\nthe above material objects which were actually in the custody of the
\nappellant\/accused and produced pursuant to his confessional statement, would
\nsuffice pointing to the guilt of the accused.\n<\/p>\n
\t12.The contention put forth by the appellant’s side that no specific
\nmotive is attributed cannot be countenanced, and the appellant was actually
\nemployed during the relevant time under A-1, and apart from that, no cash or
\nanything has been recovered from him, though it was a case of murder for gain
\ncannot be countenanced. In the instant case, cash of Rs.15,000\/- was actually
\nrecovered from A-1 at the time of his arrest and pursuant to the confessional
\nstatement made by him.  Now the contention put forth by the learned Counsel for
\nthe appellant do not carry merit whatsoever.  In the case on hand, though the
\nprosecution rested its case on the circumstantial evidence, the above two
\ncircumstances, in the considered opinion of the Court, are so strong enough
\npointing to the involvement of the appellant\/accused in the murder in question.
\nUnder the circumstances, the learned trial Judge was perfectly correct in coming
\nto the conclusion and finding him guilty under the above provisions of law and
\nawarding the punishment referred to above.  This Court is unable to see anything
\nto disturb either factually or legally, the judgment of the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t13.In the result, this criminal appeal fails, and the same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
nsv<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1.The Additional Sessions Judge
\n  Fast Track Court No.I
\n  Tuticorin\n<\/p>\n
2.The Inspector of Police
\n  Pudukottai Police Station
\n  Tuticorin District
\n  (Crime No.674 of 2005)\n<\/p>\n
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor
\n  Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
\n  Madurai<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 1\/7\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY CRL.A.(MD) No.88 of 2009 Murugan alias Amman Thoppu Murugan alias Eral Murugan .. Appellant vs State represented by The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-31117","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMurugan Alias Amman Thoppu ... vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu ... vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-06-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-21T05:37:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-21T05:37:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2516,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu ... vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-21T05:37:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu ... vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu ... vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-06-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-21T05:37:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-06-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-21T05:37:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010"},"wordCount":2516,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010","name":"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu ... vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-06-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-21T05:37:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-alias-amman-thoppu-vs-state-represented-by-on-1-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Murugan Alias Amman Thoppu … vs State Represented By on 1 July, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31117","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31117"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31117\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31117"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31117"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31117"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}